If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Is Conrad right?

After basically throwing the concept of paying the max for Roy under the bus, he said an alternative would be to find a better PF and play two PF's, as long as one of the two can score in the post and one can block shots and rebound.

I hadn't really considered that, but what do you think about it?

I think it LARGELY depends on which PF you're talking about. If he means two guys the size of West or Hansbrough, hell no. But what about a 6'10 or taller PF who isn't a stick and can hold his own around the rim, and blocks shots/rebounds? Something to think about.

But no names immediately come to mind, and once we come up with a list, which of them is available and worth spending on in FA or in a trade?

Re: Is Conrad right?

If he was a big sum*****, OK. Like a lot of the other 6'11" "power forwards" in the NBA.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
"But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetimeís worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

Re: Is Conrad right?

And that's the issue right there. And if we find a PF that is as good as you describe, guess what. We're going to have to pay him as much as we'd have to pay Roy Hibbert, if not more. And then what? We reach the playoffs and teams front the new PF just like they fronted Roy and we're back where we started.

Really, signing/matching Roy should not be an issue. It should be done, period. After years of playing without an inside presence and stretch 4's, we finally get an inside presence and we're going to let him get away? I just don't see it. I know he's not Shaq or anything, but the Pacers wouldn't be paying him like that anyway.

Ideally, the Pacers will find a PG this season that can throw a decent post entry pass.

Re: Is Conrad right?

After basically throwing the concept of paying the max for Roy under the bus, he said an alternative would be to find a better PF and play two PF's, as long as one of the two can score in the post and one can block shots and rebound.

I hadn't really considered that, but what do you think about it?

I think it LARGELY depends on which PF you're talking about. If he means two guys the size of West or Hansbrough, hell no. But what about a 6'10 or taller PF who isn't a stick and can hold his own around the rim, and blocks shots/rebounds? Something to think about.

Hicks its really a tough call man. I hate to loose big Roy for many reasons but it does call into question Roy's ability to improve greatly or if he will always be a 12 and 8 guy , who disappears at times. Would we be better with a Tyson Chandler/ Jordan Hill type undersized but good defender and rebounder? Or do we need that legit 7 footer. I knew this was bound to happen that Roy would get a max. I think we should match the offer because , providing Roy dosnt stop working, we should always be able to trade Roy if necessary

The one thing that scares me is I see us going from a period of time where we consistently werent good enough to make the playoffs, yet too good to make the lotery. Now we are in a situatioon where we seem to be good enough to be that 2-4 seed yet not good enough to challenge the Miami's /Bulls

I think more than anything we need that go to stud. Not sure how we get them but enough with the signing of good but not great players like G Hill for 40M
But no names immediately come to mind, and once we come up with a list, which of them is available and worth spending on in FA or in a trade?

Re: Is Conrad right?

Nobody immediately comes to mind for me either, but it is something I have been considering. One of the arguments for keeping Roy is the lack of quality centers in the league. This is a valid argument, but perhaps a dated one. Maybe the league is going away from traditional centers. Maybe the traditional center in the NBA is equal to the fullback in the NFL. And, just as the NFL offenses have evolved to the point where a fullback is no longer even on most teams, maybe the NBA is at a place in time where traditional centers have lost some importance.

Let me stress that I have not yet come to this conclusion, but I do think it is worth considering.

Re: Is Conrad right?

Sure if your ok with a record hovering around .500%

Roy wasn't just a tall figure out there, he was the anchor of our entire defense. David West could barely defend his own man let alone any help side defense and any defender that is going to be as good as Roy or better than Roy is going to cost almost as much as Roy.

I've been holding out because I kept telling myself we had till the 14th to make a move here (matching in this case) and that we are just working all angles before making the comittment.

But it now seems like they are setting us up to let us know they are going to let him walk. We still have time so until it either happens or they come out and say it's going to happen I won't panic, but I'm telling you if they let Roy walk and we can bring in no other significant players this off season I am going to be mightily p!ssed.

Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

Re: Is Conrad right?

Only thing I could imagine is Josh Smith, and I think he's too inconsistent to depend on... An option for the Pacers in next years free agency. But, EVEN IF WE MATCH Roy, and dump salary (Dahntay, Hans, and DC) we would have enough for him to play WITH Roy and West in the future, so long as his first year is at or below 11m. AFTER re-siging Roy and Hill we'd be at around 42 million. Giving us about 13 million, but we're probably going to sign some veteran to fill out the big man spot until then, hopefully for one year.

The trick here this summer, I think, is to get a scoring wing on a one year deal with the opportunity to re-sign him. Kevin Martin (The guy I want us to trade our scraps for, who is on the market), JJ Reddick, Anthony Morrow, and Jarrett Jack could be targets. Then this player would come off the books, with the vet big man we sign (Kenyon Martin, Jermaine O'Neal, or Antawn Jamison), and David West. Leaving us with Paul George, Danny Granger, George Hill, Roy Hibbert, Miles Plumlee, and Orlando Johnson under contract, eating up around 42-44 million. Leaving us leeway to get a big man like Josh Smith or Paul Milsap.

After we go after one of those guys, we re-sign David West and our wing.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:

Re: Is Conrad right?

IMO it can be done effectively, but it has to be the correct combo of PFs. The Pistons really did if with the Wallace boys. Rasheed was more of a stretch forward. Wallace just sagged down on the back side to block shots. I know some will say that Ben was really a Center, but I don't necessarily agree. You still need an enforcer and shot blocker around the rim. The other needs to be athletic with some range. West can shoot a little, but I don't know that he is the ideal PF to match another PF with.

IMO it can be done effectively, but it has to be the correct combo of PFs. The Pistons really did if with the Wallace boys. Rasheed was more of a stretch forward. Wallace just sagged down on the back side to block shots. I know some will say that Ben was really a Center, but I don't necessarily agree. You still need an enforcer and shot blocker around the rim. The other needs to be athletic with some range. West can shoot a little, but I don't know that he is the ideal PF to match another PF with.

Ben Wallace was a center. There's really no controversy here. I watched him play the position for a solid decade.

The man was the same height as rip Hamilton, but that didn't make him any less of a center. And to say he just "sagged back and blocked shots" is one of the biggest understatements I've ever heard. I cannot think of a less accurate assessment of wallace's defense.

It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Kstat For This Useful Post:

Re: Is Conrad right?

Worrisome that Bruno is floating this out there, what was the context?

I think alot of teams in today NBA do this, essentially. There aren't enough big men to go around, especially in the East. What teams in the East have good true centers?

You could argue it either way, East teams don't have true centers who are good, so having Roy is a big advantage OR Teams in the East don't have true centers who are good, so you could compete without one.

The Following User Says Thank You to Speed For This Useful Post:

Re: Is Conrad right?

Guys like Nene, Okafor, Rashard Lewis, Al Jefferson, and maybe Jason Thompson come to mind. Would I rather have Roy than any of them? Yes, of course. If we do lose Roy it's not like guys like that are cheap or even that great. Roy is what we need. Even Aldridge doesn't like to play center. That is why they are trying to get Roy.

The Following User Says Thank You to pacers74 For This Useful Post:

Re: Is Conrad right?

Does Conrad work for the Pacers anymore? They introduced him as being for Fox Sports Midwest? I was just wondering since if he doesn't work for the Pacers, maybe he doesn't have as much contact with the front office as he used to. Or maybe I'm just telling myself that because I didn't like what he was selling.

Re: Is Conrad right?

I fully expect the Pacers to re-sign Roy.

Sure two power forwards can work great, look at Sheed and Ben Wallace.

Unlike some of you even though Conrad is paid by the pacers to run their website, I do not believe he floats ideas the pacers want him to float. I believe is is largely an independent voice. (I mean mark Boyle is paid by the pacers too, but he isn't the pacers mouthpiece)

Re: Is Conrad right?

After basically throwing the concept of paying the max for Roy under the bus, he said an alternative would be to find a better PF and play two PF's, as long as one of the two can score in the post and one can block shots and rebound.

I hadn't really considered that, but what do you think about it?

I think it LARGELY depends on which PF you're talking about. If he means two guys the size of West or Hansbrough, hell no. But what about a 6'10 or taller PF who isn't a stick and can hold his own around the rim, and blocks shots/rebounds? Something to think about.

But no names immediately come to mind, and once we come up with a list, which of them is available and worth spending on in FA or in a trade?

I like the idea myself. Of course I've always been more of a fan of a defensive anchor on the front line. Similar to how Dale Davis used to play.